rockaction
Footballguy
I should have said "necessarily" at one point in that posting and there wouldn't be much debate over what I'm personally trying to say. I believe that the "one-read" thing is not necessarily lazy racial analysis like, say, comparing Trey Lance to Jameis Winston (which has been done) is lazily racial.
PFF has Fields with the highest rating of all passers once he progresses past his first read. The second? Zach Wilson. By a .05 of a grade. So I'm not sure that the points being made in favor of the counter-narrative going around (that Wilson reads defenses poorly and should slide in the draft in comparison to Fields) is warranted, in at least that respect.
My take is that we're seeing an over-correction to the narrative by guys that make their political leanings front and center of their discussions often in professional/personal realms. Now that's fact. I happen, by temperament, to not trust the knee-jerk analysis that flows therefrom unless there's really good reason to do so.
But I think Fields' case falls under that category of having a "really good reason." Ergo, a counter-narrative that I believe is flawed (most great college QBs that have the arm strength to play in the pros but don't make it are "one-read" guys at some level almost by definition) turns out right this time because of Fields' assignments in his college playbook.
I hope that's the last we re-visit the issue, though I'm not holding out any hope.
Last edited by a moderator:
